| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:46 - May 4 with 3463 views | PinnerPaul |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 17:54 - May 3 by daveB |
wouldn't that always be the case though that people pulling the strings get on with each other. Every manager who gets a job tends to bring his own staff with him which is pretty much the same thing |
Agree Dave and that's my beef with the article really - nothing much in there that doesn't happen at every football club.
Look at the diverse views on here, not really that earth shattering that the board members, the executive staff and ALL the football staff don't agree all on everything is it?
My other cynical thought regarding the 'communication' is how would ANYONE know?
Calls, texts, video calls, zoom meetings, face to face to meeting at KPFS or literally anywhere, how would one person keep a track on that, even Mrs Warburton would struggle!  |  | |  |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:49 - May 4 with 3441 views | PinnerPaul |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 23:08 - May 3 by LazyFan |
I don't know why there is speculation on what type of club we are. Les and Hoos have already stated we are a selling club.
So, either you do clever business in the xfer market or you grow your own or you do both. We have to grow players its that simple, Warbs blocked all paths to 1st team and then his 1st team did not deliver. His loans were expensive and there are no possible signings from them like we did with Field and JoJo.
If that was the case and he blocked growth, then yes he had to go. We must grow talent and sell it, it is the only way now.
There is no choice, it's that simple, grow and sell or die. |
Field and JoJo were his loan signings that we DID sign no?
Blocked all paths to the 1st team is a bit harsh as well - which U23 has he blocked who would conceivably have made a difference? | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:51 - May 4 with 3421 views | PinnerPaul |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 23:29 - May 3 by Myke |
But you have to have talent to grow in the first place. Also the waters were muddied by a second remit, which was to make the play-offs, The two remits may eventually become compatible (Brentford), but only over a significant period of time and only by selling one asset per year and replacing him with a younger but potentially as good replacement. So Warburton was under pressure to deliver two incompatible remits and he is looking at the u23's and thinking ' there is nothing here to help us get up'. Very difficult position to find himself in.
It is (eventually) achievable, but it sends out contrasting signals to the fans. To be honest, once we retained our 4 loanees from Jan 2021, my only thought was that we were having a tilt at promotion, I wasn't thinking about how much we could get for Willock etc. I would say many fans felt the same way. |
Exactly Myke.
We finish top 6, I don't see pages and pages on here extolling the virtues of the U23s. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:52 - May 4 with 3403 views | derbyhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:31 - May 4 by Northolt_Rs |
QPR u23 P23 W6 D3 L14
QPR u18 P23 W3 D5 L15
Both teams finished rock bottom of the respective leagues. [Post edited 4 May 2022 8:34]
|
I don't think it is too wise to look too closely at the results of youth teams.
Anybody who might graduate from U23s to First team has been out on loan. Armstrong, Drewe, Gubbins, Bettache, SDM, Mahorn, Alfa, Dominic and several others I've missed.
Sometimes it's a case that loan spells prove they aren't good enough, while somebody else pays their wages.
We'd also used in excess of 60 different players, so there won't be any continuity. Or playing pattern.
U18s are competing with Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Fulham, Reading and Watford among others. So no surprise if the best kids go elsewhere. E.g. bakary Sako is, I believe, from Greenford.
We've managed to pick up PL cast offs, post 18, and done OK with them, e.g. Eze, Chair, Willock, Lumley.
I'm not trying to gloss over the failings but hope the new training ground will help with Youth recruitment. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:53 - May 4 with 3393 views | daveB |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 12:38 - May 4 by Northernr |
A few months maybe not, but we haven't been going up for a long time now, I would have expected them to have at least had a conversation by the start of April. It's May now.
It hasn't worked very well keeping them completely in the dark has it?
I just think it's a shtty way to deal with people, and you should treat people as you expect to be treated yourself. BOS and Manning both got grief for the way they handled their situations, we haven't got a moral leg to stand on now if Dickie or Willock were to do the same to us. |
yeah I do agree with you just trying to offer other side of argument and understand why they did it this way, It's odd as it is not something they have done in previous years even when the manager was going |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 16:04 - May 4 with 3318 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:09 - May 4 by Burnleyhoop |
And that in truth, is nearly always where we will pick up our next generation of first team players.
To expect a regular supply of academy graduates coming through to the first team is idiotic. The strategy of buying cheap prospects like Willock, Dickie and Dunne and developing them by giving them first team experience or loans moves, is always going to be far more productive and ultimately lucrative than waiting and hoping for the next Sterling to miraculously appear.
The scouting network needs to be more of a priority, imo, than youth development. We could be waiting for years before seeing the academy produce what is required.
We also need to stop wasting what meagre financial resources we have on older has beens for very short term gains. We gambled again and are now back in the shit with the blame game in full swing. |
Indeed, Burnley. It's particularly fanciful to expect a regular supply of academy graduates when we're one of three clubs in the same borough, let alone all the clubs in and around London. It's well documented that the likes of Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, etc. hoover up all the young talent so IMHO it's more prudent for QPR to keep an eye on their development as well as scout the lower leagues and abroad. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 16:13 - May 4 with 3275 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:38 - May 4 by Antti_Heinola |
Something that Dave, and many others, fail to mention when discussing the 'costs' of an Academy, or youth system, is the responsibility of a professional club to the local community. It should be there both to find players but also to provide links with the community and give the sense that it is a club that supports its environs and the people within it. I find it pretty disgusting that any professional club would abandon its academy personally. |
No disrespect but I wholeheartedly disagree with this ideological view. QPR is not a charity; it's a professional football club and a business running on a tight budget. The job of the academy is to identify and develop future footballing talent, providing a pathway to the first team. It does not have responsibility for care in the community; that's a separate function within the organisation and, whilst important, is frankly secondary to the business of producing a competitive football team. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 17:11 - May 4 with 3141 views | PunteR |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 16:13 - May 4 by Benny_the_Ball |
No disrespect but I wholeheartedly disagree with this ideological view. QPR is not a charity; it's a professional football club and a business running on a tight budget. The job of the academy is to identify and develop future footballing talent, providing a pathway to the first team. It does not have responsibility for care in the community; that's a separate function within the organisation and, whilst important, is frankly secondary to the business of producing a competitive football team. |
I think there's room for both departments but if we're going to throw all our eggs in one basket it has to be into the 1st team. The academy is secondary and waaay down the list of priorities. We have multi billionaires running the club and if youth development doesn't fall under the FFP rules then I'm sure that gives the board some scope to make that a successful venture without it destabilising the day to day workings of a successful 1st team.
The new training ground will be the spring board for the academy side I'm sure and will attract young players. This thing about a route into the 1st team being the key doesn't stack up to me as most youngsters that sign for the Chelseas and Arsenal's of this world don't have a hope in hell getting to the 1st team anyway , so what is it that attracts them to those clubs? Good coaches, training facilities, money? I honestly don't know. [Post edited 4 May 2022 17:39]
|  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Warbs from West London Sport on 17:17 - May 4 with 3076 views | NewBee |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:25 - May 4 by nadera78 |
Just on your last point re Brentford's use of the B team, they have submitted a planning application to develop their training ground and it includes Academy facilities, so they are heading back to having that more conventional set up in the near future. |
Yes, BFC are likely to reintroduce an Academy, to coincide with their expanded training ground (though the TG funding was still dependant upon staying in the PL).
Anyhow, people have a misplaced view on BFC's approach to Academies. For when they latest version was introdiuced a few years back, as a sign of their commitment, BFC were one of only 2 or 3 League One teams with a Grade B Academy. They spent literally millions on it, including a huge big indoor training facility, which was also for the use of the High School in Uxbridge where academicians were receiving their education.
Then the PL changed the rules on transfers/compensation re EFL clubs, in return for a few million quid bribe to the 72. Next thing, BFC lost their two most promising youngsters to L'pool and Man. City for the new £50k cap each, when previously they might have expected half a million for each one.
At that stage, Benham decided he wasn't going to spend his millions on producing players for the Big Boys, so he closed it and developed the "B" team concept instead.
The B team has been hugely successful, but that is now in doubt, since Brexit means they can no longer sign eg promising 19 y.o.s from France's Ligue 2 (work permit, basically).
Which means they're revisiting the idea of an Academy for a number of reasons. Basically as a PL team, they're more likely to keep their best youngsters. And I suspect the jump from B Team to PL is so much harder than to the Championship. And (don't laugh!) the club has mentioned that running an Academy is a requirement to play in European competition, which tells you all you need to know about the club's future ambitions. (I said "don't laugh!"). | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 18:30 - May 4 with 2851 views | CamberleyR |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 17:17 - May 4 by NewBee |
Yes, BFC are likely to reintroduce an Academy, to coincide with their expanded training ground (though the TG funding was still dependant upon staying in the PL).
Anyhow, people have a misplaced view on BFC's approach to Academies. For when they latest version was introdiuced a few years back, as a sign of their commitment, BFC were one of only 2 or 3 League One teams with a Grade B Academy. They spent literally millions on it, including a huge big indoor training facility, which was also for the use of the High School in Uxbridge where academicians were receiving their education.
Then the PL changed the rules on transfers/compensation re EFL clubs, in return for a few million quid bribe to the 72. Next thing, BFC lost their two most promising youngsters to L'pool and Man. City for the new £50k cap each, when previously they might have expected half a million for each one.
At that stage, Benham decided he wasn't going to spend his millions on producing players for the Big Boys, so he closed it and developed the "B" team concept instead.
The B team has been hugely successful, but that is now in doubt, since Brexit means they can no longer sign eg promising 19 y.o.s from France's Ligue 2 (work permit, basically).
Which means they're revisiting the idea of an Academy for a number of reasons. Basically as a PL team, they're more likely to keep their best youngsters. And I suspect the jump from B Team to PL is so much harder than to the Championship. And (don't laugh!) the club has mentioned that running an Academy is a requirement to play in European competition, which tells you all you need to know about the club's future ambitions. (I said "don't laugh!"). |
How have those two former youngsters of yours fared? Have they fallen down the black hole like Josh Bowler did at Everton when he left us? |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 19:08 - May 4 with 2730 views | NewBee |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 18:30 - May 4 by CamberleyR |
How have those two former youngsters of yours fared? Have they fallen down the black hole like Josh Bowler did at Everton when he left us? |
Yes and No.
Hardy signed for Liverpool, got nowhere, then signed for Accy Stanley ("Who are they?"), who have since lent him to Inverness Caley Thistle.
Poveda signed for Man City, got nowhere, but then signed for Leeds for £1.5m(?), where he did ok, including 18 PL appearances last season.
Leeds lent him out to B'burn this season, where he was a regular starter until he broke his ankle.
Obv BFC's gripe was in getting shafted over the laughable "compensation" fees, but more generally, this reflects that the Big Boys' are happy to warehouse loads of young kids, on the basis that 0.1% might make it - and to hell with the rest! [Post edited 4 May 2022 19:10]
| | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 19:12 - May 4 with 2733 views | charmr |
All the talent especially in the south east gets hoovered up by the big clubs especially that lot. So whats left, released academy players or local players who are ok but then will literally leap forward in leaps and bounds in a football environment and become decent players. Sometimes they get lucky, Sterling. It’s tough, Che#eas academy is full of aspiring players who’s parents see the chance to make a lot of money if there offsprings make it. Money and housing is offered by some clubs also to persuade parents. It’s a challenge for clubs like Rangers in the modern age.
I have met and spoke to the Southampton academy guys a few times. With the advent of the premier league football is now seen as a career rather then education for some. Now middle class families are more ok with their there kids pursuing a football path. Southampton academy’s had the best spoken kids I’ve heard since being around the shops near Harrow School.
The clever people now are the guys running Brentford and Brighton by using stats and equations in making decisions. The challenge for clubs and coaches in the UK is how to develop the number 10. A Gascoigne for example. [Post edited 4 May 2022 19:29]
| | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 19:56 - May 4 with 2590 views | 1JD |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 15:52 - May 4 by derbyhoop |
I don't think it is too wise to look too closely at the results of youth teams.
Anybody who might graduate from U23s to First team has been out on loan. Armstrong, Drewe, Gubbins, Bettache, SDM, Mahorn, Alfa, Dominic and several others I've missed.
Sometimes it's a case that loan spells prove they aren't good enough, while somebody else pays their wages.
We'd also used in excess of 60 different players, so there won't be any continuity. Or playing pattern.
U18s are competing with Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Fulham, Reading and Watford among others. So no surprise if the best kids go elsewhere. E.g. bakary Sako is, I believe, from Greenford.
We've managed to pick up PL cast offs, post 18, and done OK with them, e.g. Eze, Chair, Willock, Lumley.
I'm not trying to gloss over the failings but hope the new training ground will help with Youth recruitment. |
Every other club in the land is also sending out players on loan to lower leagues, we are certainly not in a camp of one. Far from it. This is the norm.
And thus, by extension, all other teams we play against u18s and u23s are also missing so called key players. It’s a level playing field.
The fact is the u18s have finished bottom for the last 3 seasons running. No amount of deflection by Paul Hall and co can cover that up, but somehow it is certainly fooling some with the narrative of it’s about “individuals not results”.
Finishing bottom for 3 seasons running is absolutely not good enough at ANY level of football. The 23s have been bottom all season and aren’t much better. Finally, if we do follow the flawed argument of Hall, and the team and results are irrelevant, but the focus is on individuals, where in the world are they? | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 03:28 - May 5 with 2169 views | nadera78 |
Some on this thread have got caught up n the whole "develop our own" point. Absolutely no-one is saying we can't sign players - Dunne, Field, Willock are great examples - who have already played senior football elsewhere but are undervalued and that we can develop further. That was always part of the QPR model.
The point being made is that we really shouldn't be signing the likes of Hendrick, when we already have Amos and Dozell as regulars (sure, they need more work) and have had glimpses that suggest Bettache and Duke-McKenna have 'some' ability and could fill in for odd games here and there.
And beyond that, we really, really, really shouldn't be signing players because one of the owners knows and likes them. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:05 - May 5 with 1919 views | gobbles |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 03:28 - May 5 by nadera78 |
Some on this thread have got caught up n the whole "develop our own" point. Absolutely no-one is saying we can't sign players - Dunne, Field, Willock are great examples - who have already played senior football elsewhere but are undervalued and that we can develop further. That was always part of the QPR model.
The point being made is that we really shouldn't be signing the likes of Hendrick, when we already have Amos and Dozell as regulars (sure, they need more work) and have had glimpses that suggest Bettache and Duke-McKenna have 'some' ability and could fill in for odd games here and there.
And beyond that, we really, really, really shouldn't be signing players because one of the owners knows and likes them. |
Whose idea was Hendrick? Rumours I heard were the man with connection at Newcastle is the Director of Football. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:20 - May 5 with 1872 views | stevec |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 19:56 - May 4 by 1JD |
Every other club in the land is also sending out players on loan to lower leagues, we are certainly not in a camp of one. Far from it. This is the norm.
And thus, by extension, all other teams we play against u18s and u23s are also missing so called key players. It’s a level playing field.
The fact is the u18s have finished bottom for the last 3 seasons running. No amount of deflection by Paul Hall and co can cover that up, but somehow it is certainly fooling some with the narrative of it’s about “individuals not results”.
Finishing bottom for 3 seasons running is absolutely not good enough at ANY level of football. The 23s have been bottom all season and aren’t much better. Finally, if we do follow the flawed argument of Hall, and the team and results are irrelevant, but the focus is on individuals, where in the world are they? |
You have to wonder how the man in charge of that lot hangs on to his job.
And who gets the job of selling the U18’s to prospective parents, you’d imagine only the not quite good enough might be attracted to come here.
We are a Championship club with a youth system that plays in the lower reaches of academy leagues. The whole concept of us self developing is doomed to failure.
Brentford have it right as politely pointed out by the fella who posts on here. |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:34 - May 5 with 1827 views | 1JD |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:20 - May 5 by stevec |
You have to wonder how the man in charge of that lot hangs on to his job.
And who gets the job of selling the U18’s to prospective parents, you’d imagine only the not quite good enough might be attracted to come here.
We are a Championship club with a youth system that plays in the lower reaches of academy leagues. The whole concept of us self developing is doomed to failure.
Brentford have it right as politely pointed out by the fella who posts on here. |
A great point.
The “sign on to the QPR academy” sales pitch is not exactly helped by finishing bottom of the U18s league for 3 seasons running is it? So much so, you’d imagine it is a complete turn off. What gives? | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:44 - May 5 with 1789 views | nadera78 |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:05 - May 5 by gobbles |
Whose idea was Hendrick? Rumours I heard were the man with connection at Newcastle is the Director of Football. |
According to the article in the OP it was Warburton who wanted Hendrick to add experience, because that's where he felt Brentford fell short in their play-off campaign under him. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:59 - May 5 with 1730 views | stevec |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 10:48 - May 3 by Northernr |
One of the issues here is Hall to a certain extent, Ferdinand to a certain extent, and Ramsey to a massive extent, have to justify their position by pointing to kids making it into the first team. They want to be saying LOOK - FIVE NEW ACADEMY GRADS THIS YEAR.
Whether they're good enough is kind of secondary...
There's an awful lot of cooks at QPR trying to justify a position at the broth pot.
As Dave Mc says if the first team is gunning for promotion fair enough, but if you're finishing sixteenth again with Wallace, Hendricks, Odubajo etc then they'll think you could be doing that cheaper with more development players - particularly if their position at the club is justified by development players getting a chance.
When we interviewed Hall he was talking about how few other clubs have graduated as many to first team as we have. But when you look at the list of youth teamers who made a first team debut in the last six or seven years a hell of a lot got a quick go in a cup game and were never seen again, and lots more arrived at the club late teens from elsewhere (marked with a *)...
Murphy Mahoney, 20, 2(0), debut v Preston April 2022
Aaron Drewe, 21, 0(1), debut v Rotherham FA Cup January 2022
Ody Alfa, 23, 0(1), debut v Oxford League Cup Aug 2021
Stephen Duke-McKenna*, 0(4), debut v Oxford League Cup Aug 2021
Seny Dieng*, 27, 72(0), debut v Middlesbrough September 2020
Joe Gubbins, 20, 0(3), debut v Swansea FA Cup January 2020
Conor Masterson*, 23, 16(4), debut v Swansea FA Cup, January 2020
Deshane Darling, 23, 0(1), debut v Swansea FA Cup, January 2020
Aramide Oteh*, 23, 7(14), debut v Millwall December 2017
Faysal Bettache, 21, 1(12), debut v Bristol Rovers League Cup Aug 2017
Charlie Owens*, 24, 1(2), debut v Bristol Rovers League Cup Aug 2017
Ilias Chair*, 24, 122(26), debut v Northampton League Cup Aug 2017
Ebere Eze*, 23, 94(18), debut v Blackburn FA Cup January 2017
Nico Hamailainen, 25, 22(7), debut v Sunderland League Cup Sep 2016
Osman Kakay, 23, 49(13),debut v Rochdale League Cup Aug 2016
Ryan Manning*, 25, 82(14), debu v Wolves December 2016
Mide Shodipo, 24, 10(23), debut v Leeds August 2016
Joe Lumley*, 27, 83(1), debut v Forest FA Cup January 2016
Darnell Furlong, 26, 65(7), debut v Hull February 2015
Michael Petrasso, 26, 4(9), debut v Barnsley May 2014
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Very insightful.
So the only fully home grown player to make it at this level is Furlong and that was 7 years ago, I assume that might have even been before the present regime got their foot under the door. Am I thinking Gallen era? | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 with 1641 views | Hunterhoop |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:05 - May 5 by gobbles |
Whose idea was Hendrick? Rumours I heard were the man with connection at Newcastle is the Director of Football. |
Not what I heard. In fact the opposite. The DoF wanted a forward not a midfielder (he’s on record as saying that a week after the window closed, isn’t he?!), and we were offered someone at Newcastle because of his links, but that Warburton did not want. Warburton wanted a midfielder, dug his heels in so the question was asked of Newcastle (and others) if they had one, and Hendrick was offered. The forward we were offered was Dwight Gayle. Warburton didn’t want him.
I’ve read through the article and comments and disagree with most. On the basis of the article, they could not renew his contract. I’m happy with the decision. I would have done the same thing in business.
The club have been VERY clear about the need to develop talent and having a pathway to the first team. That is the club’s identity. It is very clear. And as a few have pointed out, it is the only option we have to survive, unless you want to put it all on red and gamble the club’s existence. Financially, we must follow this approach. With our income there is no other option. If your first team coach/manager is blocking that pathway, not speaking to the youth coaches (many of whom are highly rated in the industry!), and choosing to not even stick some on the bench, you have to change him. It’s him who is not following the club’s vision and ethos. It’s a shame but it’s unavoidable.
Developing from within doesn’t mean not signing young talent from other clubs either; they go hand in hand. But Warburton’s three players he dug his heels in on (and ultimately got his way with) this season were Johansen, Gray, and Hendrick. As I explained in a post on another thread, we are likely going to finish the same as or lower than we did in Warburton’s first season, but we’ve sold Eze since then, taken the cash, but not improved or developed more players through from the U23/U18s into the first team. I don’t see how you can make a case for Warburton being successful in terms of the club’s need for talent development to create saleable asserts to maintain existence, nor a better first team. Dickie and Dunne were Belk. Willock was Banfield.
There is also something that Dave Mc isn’t reporting yet, that I have heard, that is quite damaging to Warburton if it came out. He got his way, but it reflects very poorly on his judgement and May well have causes issues in the squad.
On the players’ contract situation, I agree that this has been shoddy. There are very few excuses, but there are a few things to consider which no one has mentioned:
- could the club have had initial discussions with the players’ agents, but because there is no firm offer yet the players are being told by their agents “no news”. It doesn’t mean there has been no contact
- if the Board knew they were not renewing Warburton’s contract, might they want the new manager to be appointed and have a say in who we renew? Remember our budget will be very very tight. Barbet could be on a decent salary that the new fella might rather invest in a forward, if he thinks De Wijs, Gubbins, Masterson could all cut it and/or wants to play a 4. It would make sense to have his input at least
- with the American investor the board might be finalising what the budget looks like for next year depending on any investment to be made.
- as Clive mentioned, I’m sure we’ve massively overspent this season, so the Finance dept may be really struggling to offer much of a pot at all (3 yr FFP) and they are frantically trying to find ways to release budget to make offers (e.g. Austin’s clause and subsequent absence to free up costs). |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 with 1639 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 08:59 - May 5 by stevec |
Very insightful.
So the only fully home grown player to make it at this level is Furlong and that was 7 years ago, I assume that might have even been before the present regime got their foot under the door. Am I thinking Gallen era? |
Yet, the season before last we had the most minutes played in the season by graduates of any Championship club, apparently (though I suspect that included teenage signings like Chair and Eze).
There's no doubt that we've brought loads of players through under Ramsey, Ferdinand et al, but whether we need to keep the Youth part of the Underage set-up is a good debate. My worry is that if we're not Cat 1 we lose players to other clubs, but no-one seems to care about that so i seem to be out there on my own on that one.
Against that, the costs of the Academy do not count against FP/P&S so we're getting very cheap minutes from graduating players for a few years now which has helped us free up money to sign good players from elsewhere.
Note: Darnell Furlong broke through six years ago, under Ramsey and Ferdinand et al, though he'd been at the club a while at that stage naturally. |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:34 - May 5 with 1573 views | switchingcode |
The fine margins in football on show here another 6 points and none of this would have surfaced.Like last night the comms were saying 2 English sides are going to be in the final then within 2 minutes …. | | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:37 - May 5 with 1561 views | W7Ranger |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 by BrianMcCarthy |
Yet, the season before last we had the most minutes played in the season by graduates of any Championship club, apparently (though I suspect that included teenage signings like Chair and Eze).
There's no doubt that we've brought loads of players through under Ramsey, Ferdinand et al, but whether we need to keep the Youth part of the Underage set-up is a good debate. My worry is that if we're not Cat 1 we lose players to other clubs, but no-one seems to care about that so i seem to be out there on my own on that one.
Against that, the costs of the Academy do not count against FP/P&S so we're getting very cheap minutes from graduating players for a few years now which has helped us free up money to sign good players from elsewhere.
Note: Darnell Furlong broke through six years ago, under Ramsey and Ferdinand et al, though he'd been at the club a while at that stage naturally. |
Lumley?
Kakay? |  | | |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:37 - May 5 with 1561 views | TheChef |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
Not what I heard. In fact the opposite. The DoF wanted a forward not a midfielder (he’s on record as saying that a week after the window closed, isn’t he?!), and we were offered someone at Newcastle because of his links, but that Warburton did not want. Warburton wanted a midfielder, dug his heels in so the question was asked of Newcastle (and others) if they had one, and Hendrick was offered. The forward we were offered was Dwight Gayle. Warburton didn’t want him.
I’ve read through the article and comments and disagree with most. On the basis of the article, they could not renew his contract. I’m happy with the decision. I would have done the same thing in business.
The club have been VERY clear about the need to develop talent and having a pathway to the first team. That is the club’s identity. It is very clear. And as a few have pointed out, it is the only option we have to survive, unless you want to put it all on red and gamble the club’s existence. Financially, we must follow this approach. With our income there is no other option. If your first team coach/manager is blocking that pathway, not speaking to the youth coaches (many of whom are highly rated in the industry!), and choosing to not even stick some on the bench, you have to change him. It’s him who is not following the club’s vision and ethos. It’s a shame but it’s unavoidable.
Developing from within doesn’t mean not signing young talent from other clubs either; they go hand in hand. But Warburton’s three players he dug his heels in on (and ultimately got his way with) this season were Johansen, Gray, and Hendrick. As I explained in a post on another thread, we are likely going to finish the same as or lower than we did in Warburton’s first season, but we’ve sold Eze since then, taken the cash, but not improved or developed more players through from the U23/U18s into the first team. I don’t see how you can make a case for Warburton being successful in terms of the club’s need for talent development to create saleable asserts to maintain existence, nor a better first team. Dickie and Dunne were Belk. Willock was Banfield.
There is also something that Dave Mc isn’t reporting yet, that I have heard, that is quite damaging to Warburton if it came out. He got his way, but it reflects very poorly on his judgement and May well have causes issues in the squad.
On the players’ contract situation, I agree that this has been shoddy. There are very few excuses, but there are a few things to consider which no one has mentioned:
- could the club have had initial discussions with the players’ agents, but because there is no firm offer yet the players are being told by their agents “no news”. It doesn’t mean there has been no contact
- if the Board knew they were not renewing Warburton’s contract, might they want the new manager to be appointed and have a say in who we renew? Remember our budget will be very very tight. Barbet could be on a decent salary that the new fella might rather invest in a forward, if he thinks De Wijs, Gubbins, Masterson could all cut it and/or wants to play a 4. It would make sense to have his input at least
- with the American investor the board might be finalising what the budget looks like for next year depending on any investment to be made.
- as Clive mentioned, I’m sure we’ve massively overspent this season, so the Finance dept may be really struggling to offer much of a pot at all (3 yr FFP) and they are frantically trying to find ways to release budget to make offers (e.g. Austin’s clause and subsequent absence to free up costs). |
All valid points HH.
"There is also something that Dave Mc isn’t reporting yet, that I have heard, that is quite damaging to Warburton if it came out."
Intriguing...and also some of the stories have already pointed to his stubbornness, but then was he right to take that stance or not re the u23 players? Only time will tell I suppose.
The other point is whether a change of ownership is also likely to happen, and what finances they may bring in for the new manager (again I suppose within the limits of FFP...) |  |
| |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:38 - May 5 with 1554 views | enfieldargh |
| Warbs from West London Sport on 09:22 - May 5 by Hunterhoop |
Not what I heard. In fact the opposite. The DoF wanted a forward not a midfielder (he’s on record as saying that a week after the window closed, isn’t he?!), and we were offered someone at Newcastle because of his links, but that Warburton did not want. Warburton wanted a midfielder, dug his heels in so the question was asked of Newcastle (and others) if they had one, and Hendrick was offered. The forward we were offered was Dwight Gayle. Warburton didn’t want him.
I’ve read through the article and comments and disagree with most. On the basis of the article, they could not renew his contract. I’m happy with the decision. I would have done the same thing in business.
The club have been VERY clear about the need to develop talent and having a pathway to the first team. That is the club’s identity. It is very clear. And as a few have pointed out, it is the only option we have to survive, unless you want to put it all on red and gamble the club’s existence. Financially, we must follow this approach. With our income there is no other option. If your first team coach/manager is blocking that pathway, not speaking to the youth coaches (many of whom are highly rated in the industry!), and choosing to not even stick some on the bench, you have to change him. It’s him who is not following the club’s vision and ethos. It’s a shame but it’s unavoidable.
Developing from within doesn’t mean not signing young talent from other clubs either; they go hand in hand. But Warburton’s three players he dug his heels in on (and ultimately got his way with) this season were Johansen, Gray, and Hendrick. As I explained in a post on another thread, we are likely going to finish the same as or lower than we did in Warburton’s first season, but we’ve sold Eze since then, taken the cash, but not improved or developed more players through from the U23/U18s into the first team. I don’t see how you can make a case for Warburton being successful in terms of the club’s need for talent development to create saleable asserts to maintain existence, nor a better first team. Dickie and Dunne were Belk. Willock was Banfield.
There is also something that Dave Mc isn’t reporting yet, that I have heard, that is quite damaging to Warburton if it came out. He got his way, but it reflects very poorly on his judgement and May well have causes issues in the squad.
On the players’ contract situation, I agree that this has been shoddy. There are very few excuses, but there are a few things to consider which no one has mentioned:
- could the club have had initial discussions with the players’ agents, but because there is no firm offer yet the players are being told by their agents “no news”. It doesn’t mean there has been no contact
- if the Board knew they were not renewing Warburton’s contract, might they want the new manager to be appointed and have a say in who we renew? Remember our budget will be very very tight. Barbet could be on a decent salary that the new fella might rather invest in a forward, if he thinks De Wijs, Gubbins, Masterson could all cut it and/or wants to play a 4. It would make sense to have his input at least
- with the American investor the board might be finalising what the budget looks like for next year depending on any investment to be made.
- as Clive mentioned, I’m sure we’ve massively overspent this season, so the Finance dept may be really struggling to offer much of a pot at all (3 yr FFP) and they are frantically trying to find ways to release budget to make offers (e.g. Austin’s clause and subsequent absence to free up costs). |
I can imagine Dwight Gayle either storming through on goal linking up with a dynamic midfield or the sight of him surrounded by burley centre half’s trying to get on the end of hopefull underhit miss hit through balls or waiting for crosses that never came |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
